CSS

Modul Peny. Periodontal

Robby Ramadhonie
Analyze of JournaL
 Title : Comfort and discomfort of dental trauma
splints “a comparison of a new device (TTS) with three
commonly used splinting techniques”
 Author : Andreas Filippi, Thomas von Arx, and
Adrian Lussi
-Department of Oral Surgery, Oral Radiology and Oral
Medicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
-Department of Oral Surgery and Stomatology,
Department of Operative Dentistry, University of Berne,
Berne, Switzerland
 Received : 2002
Problem
 Traumatically loosened, displaced or avulsed permanent teeth are
normally splinted. The splinting method used for stabilization
should support periodontal healing. There are many different types
of splinting technique.
 An ideal splint should be passive and flexible to allow physiologic
tooth mobility
 From the patient’s perspective, it is important that these splints are
comfortable anddo not interferewith oral hygiene, speaking and
eating. In addition, the splints should not irritate adjacent tissues
(gingiva, lips).
 The objective of this experimental study was to compare and
evaluate titanium trauma splint (TTS), a wire-composite splint
(WCS), a resin splint (RS) and a button-bracket splint (BS) with
respect to the subjective assessment by the patient.
Intervensional
 The present experimental study compared four dental trauma splints in 10
volunteers. All subjects were female with amean age of 21years and 6months
(range 17 years and 6months to 34years and 9months)
 All four maxillary incisors in all volunteers were free of caries and periodontal
diseases. All subjects were healthy and presented no medical contraindications
for the planned procedures.
 The evaluated splints included a wire-composite splint (WCS), a button-bracket
splint (BS), a resin splint (RS), and the newly developed titaniumtrauma splint
(TTS). All splints were bonded to the labial surfaces of the maxillary lateral and
central incisors and left in place for 1week.
 After splint removal, the next splint was placed after a 1-week rest period. The
sequence of splint application was randomized for each individual. The
following subjective parameters were assessed using a visual analogue scale:
sensitiveness of splinted teeth, irritation of the gingivalmargin, irritation of the
lips, impairment of speech, eating and oral hygiene.
 All datawere analysed by descriptive methods using box plots. As they were
not normally distributed, theWilcoxon test for paired data was performed. When
employing multiple comparisons, the P-valueswere corrected using the
Bonferroni adjustment procedure.
Compare
The present experimental study compared
four dental trauma splints in 10
volunteers. The evaluated splints
included a wire-composite splint (WCS),
a button-bracket splint (BS), a resin splint
(RS), and the newly developed
titaniumtrauma splint (TTS).
Output
 None ofthe subjects withdrew from the study; atotal of 4 splints could, therefore, be
evaluated.
 The parameters ‘impairment of eating’and ‘irritation of gingival margin’ showed no
statistical differences between the four splints. However, RS showed an increasing
irritation of the gingiva over time compared to the other splints
 Sensitiveness of teeth and lips was more severe for most splints on day 1, with a
continuous recovery on the following days (Figs.6 and 7). Statistically significant di!
erences of sensitive teeth on day 1 were found for BS compared to WCS (P<0.05)
and of sensitive lips for BS compared to WCS and RS (P<0.05). At days 4a nd 7, no
statistically significant di!erences were found. Regarding impairment of speech,
signi ￠ cant di!erences were found on day 1 for BS compared to all other
splints(P<0.05) (Fig.8).
 The oral hygiene of the splinted maxillary incisors was significantly impaired by RS
Compared to the other splintsthroughout the splinting period (P<0.05) (Fig.9).
 The results show that the application of BS leads to a signi ￠ cantly higher irritation
of the lips and greater impairment of speech compared to other splints. The RS leads
to an increased and significantly higher irritation of the gingiva (P<0.05) owing to a
significant increase in cleaning dificulties
 In conclusion, WCS and TTS appear to be more accepted splints according to a
subjective assessment by 10 volunteers.
Referensi
 Critical Appraisal
ARE THE RESULTS VALID?
 Did the individual assessing the outcome criteria know whether or
not the patient had a potential prognostic factor, i.e. were they
blinded? (15)
The study not blinded, but there are have the outcome criteria such as
have a All four maxillary incisors in all volunteers were free of caries
and periodontal diseases. All subjects were healthy and presented no
medical contraindications for the planned procedures. (10)
 Was there standardisation for potentially important prognostic
factors e.g. age? (10)
All subjects were female with amean age of 21years and 6months
(range 17 years and 6months to 34years and 9months). (5)
 Was the follow-up of these patients sufficiently long and complete?
(15)
All splints were bonded and place for 1week. After splint removal, the
next splint was placed after a 1-week rest period. (10)
 WHAT ARE THE RESULTS?
 How likely are the outcome events over a specified
period of time? (15)
The treatment was considered to comfortable anddo not
interfere with oral hygiene, speaking and eating. In
addition, the splints should not irritate adjacent tissues
(gingiva, lips). (10)

 Are the results presented with confidence intervals?

(20)
Not mentioned in the journal only figure of significance
(5)
WILL THE RESULTS HELP ME WITH
THIS PATIENT?
 Will the results lead directly to selecting or avoiding a
treatment? (15)
The results of this study help us to choose from a variety of dental
splint technique (10)
 Are the results useful for reassuring or counselling my patient?
(10)
For this, could be an option as a dentist (10)

Decision to use this journal is 60%

Titanium Trauma Splint (TTS) Wire-composite splint (WCS)

Bracket Splint (BS) Resin Splint (RS)